I come back to the fact that it's first of all "criticizing" (because how can you criticize out of sheer ignorance?) a film based on the trailer.

Also, if you carry these critics' reasoning to its absurd extreme, art should never depict anything painful, violent, evil, scary, whatever - remember criticism of the Matrix films? - because "it's a trigger" and it might promote bad or dangerous behavior. That's an extremely fundamentalist view, it's censorship, it's authoritarianism. It is especially scary and offensive to me right now because of the Orwellian state of the US.

Finally a smart verdict about the movie:
But I do think that films like this one — and Netflix’s other controversial teen fiction, 13 Reasons Why — generate important conversations about serious issues, with friends, at school and at home.
It’s not sensationalising or trivialising a serious illness; it tells one person’s story.

I've seen the film. There is no way in which it "glamorizes" anorexia. Anyone who thinks that has bigger issues = they are glamorizing anorexia. Keanu's character and his portrayal are wonderful, tender, supportive but tough. And the aspect of Dr Beckham being "controversial"? Yes, he says f%@k. Ouch. And other "methods"? It's pretty well accepted that some addictive / compulsive personalities need a harsh wake-up call from life. I can totally relate to that.

I'm noticing a trend where it's primarily UK reviewers that are accusing this of glamourising anorexia but primarily US reviewers saying it was a sensitive and well done handling of a tough subject. I don't know if it's coincidence or if there are other cultural issues at play, or differences in how anorexia is treated in each country.